On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:22:11AM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 28.03.2013 00:05, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > Last time I tested the new one, and this was several months
> > ago, the system (a Dell Latitude D530 laptop) would not boot.
>
> Probably we should j
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:35:35PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 27.03.2013 23:32, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-b
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22:14PM +0200, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Since FreeBSD 9.0 we are successfully running on the new CAM-based ATA
> stack, using only some controller drivers of old ata(4) by having
> `options ATA_CAM` enabled in all kernels by default. I have a wish to
> drop no
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 02:49:51PM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 23 December 2011 11:11, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
>
> > One difference between the 2008 tests and today tests is
> > the number of available cpus. ?In 2008, I ran the tests
> > on a node with 8 cpus, whi
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 04:23:29PM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 11:47, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
>
> > There is the additional observation in one of my 2008
> > emails (URLs have been posted) that if you have N+1
> > cpu-bound jobs with, say, job0 a
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 04:23:29PM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 11:47, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
>
> > There is the additional observation in one of my 2008
> > emails (URLs have been posted) that if you have N+1
> > cpu-bound jobs with, say, job0 a
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 09:01:15PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 22/12/2011 20:45 Steve Kargl said the following:
> > I've used schedgraph to look at the ktrdump output. A jpg is
> > available at http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~kargl/freebsd/ktr.jpg
> > This
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 11:31:45AM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 04:52:50PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > I have placed several files at
> >
> > http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~kargl/freebsd
> >
> > dmesg.txt --> dme
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 11:31:45AM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 04:52:50PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
>>
>> I have placed several files at
>>
>> http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~kargl/freebsd
>>
>> dmesg.txt --> dmesg for
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 01:07:58AM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Are you able to go through the emails here and grab out Attilio's
> example for generating KTR scheduler traces?
>
Did your read this part of my email?
> >
> > Attilio,
> >
> > I have placed several files at
> >
> > http://troutmask
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:14:24PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote:
> 2011/12/15 Steve Kargl :
> > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 05:25:51PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote:
> >>
> >> I basically went through all the e-mail you just sent and identified 4
> >> real report on which
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 05:25:51PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote:
>
> I basically went through all the e-mail you just sent and identified 4
> real report on which we could work on and summarizied in the attached
> Excel file.
> I'd like that George, Steve, Doug, Andrey and Mike possibly review the
> f
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 02:23:46PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote:
> On 12/12/11 16:51, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 02:47:57PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >>
> >>> Not fully right, boinc defaults to run on idprio 31 so this isn't an
> >
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 01:03:30PM -0600, Scott Lambert wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 09:06:04AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > Tuning kern.sched.preempt_thresh did not seem to help for
> > my workload. My code is a classic master-slave OpenMPI
> > application where the ma
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 04:18:35PM +, Bruce Cran wrote:
> On 12/12/2011 15:51, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >This comes up every 9 months or so, and must be approaching FAQ
> >status. In a HPC environment, I recommend 4BSD. Depending on the
> >workload, ULE can cause a severe in
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 02:47:57PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote:
>
> > Not fully right, boinc defaults to run on idprio 31 so this isn't an
> > issue. And yes, there are cases where SCHED_ULE shows much better
> > performance then SCHED_4BSD. [...]
>
> Do we have any proof at hand for such cases whe
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:58:25AM +0100, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:20:09 +0100
> Ulrich Sp?rlein wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 20.01.2011 at 21:17:40 +0100, Ulrich Sp?rlein wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Currently our buildworld relies on groff(1) and vgrind(1) being present
> > >
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 10:59:43PM +, Alexander Best wrote:
>
> well i did exactly what they did in the video. watch a 1080p video and move
> the output window around while compiling the kernel.
>
It is trivial to bring ULE to its knees. If you
have N cores then all you need is N+1 cpu int
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:45:36PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
>
> I have another box (of many) running FreeBSD 8.0-BETA2/amd64 with 2 GB
> RAM and a Athlon64 2,2GHz CPU having 800(!) ports installed. Can you
> imagine how long this box will be occupied by 'portupgrade -af'? I guess
> 'cherry-pickin
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 12:55:04PM -0500, Josh Carroll wrote:
> > I also noticed that behavior, shouldn't compiler/linker look
> > into /usr/lib32 without additional -B switch?
> > --
> > regards, Maciej Suszko.
> >
>
> I don't know if it should or should not, but I can confirm that this
> behavio
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 02:26:15PM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote:
> Steve Kargl wrote:
> > By increasing the kernel message buffer, I was able to
> > get the previous "Unread portion" im my last email.
> >
> > Unread portion of the kernel message buffer:
> >
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 10:44:52PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote Steve Kargl thusly...
> >
> > By increasing the kernel message buffer, I was able to
> > get the previous "Unread portion" im my last email.
>
By increasing the kernel message buffer, I was able to
get the previous "Unread portion" im my last email.
Unread portion of the kernel message buffer:
lock order reversal: (sleepable after non-sleepable)
1st 0xc34caec0 ath0 (ath0) @ /usr/src/sys/dev/ath/if_ath.c:5210
2nd 0xc32cbe24 user map (us
In trying to update from a 6.2-release to 6-2.-stable,
I run into a nasty panic which results in a corrupt
backtrace. It looks like a cascade of panics. In
6.2-release, I initialize my ath wirelss NIC with the
following script
#! /bin/sh
ifconfig ath0 inet 192.168.0.10
ifconfig ath0 ssid "My_ss
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 09:20:37PM -0500, John Merryweather Cooper wrote:
> Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> >cardbus0: CIS pointer is 0!
> >cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=10, size=100
> >cardbus0: Resource not specified in CIS: id=14, size=0
> >cardbus0:
I have a colleague who installed FreeBSD 6.1-stable onto
an Alienware MJ-12 laptop. A verbose dmesg is at
http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~kargl/alienware.dmesg
We are trying to getting his wireless nic up, but seem to
have run into a cardbus issue. I've built a custom kernel
and stripped ou
Doug,
Your recent commit appears to have broken buildkernel on AMD64.
For some reason the COMPAT_LINUX32 option is not honored, so I
get the wrong header files.
/usr/obj/usr/src/make.amd64/make -V CFILES -V SYSTEM_CFILES -V GEN_CFILES |
MKDEP_CPP="cc -E" CC="cc" xargs mkdep -a -f .newdep -O2 -f
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 03:12:17PM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> Have you tried to boot with the old contigmalloc using the sysctl
> option "vm.old_contigmalloc=1"?
Yes. This makes an enormous difference in boot up times.
With vm.old_contigmalloc=1, fxp0 probes within a few seconds.
Without it, f
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 10:32:33AM +0930, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:14, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> > > Have you run sysutils/memtest86 with the 8 GB?
> >
> > Heh. Difficult when the system doesn't run.
>
> You could try http://www.memtest86.com although that doesn't do >4G
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 08:14:45AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> On Wednesday, 30 March 2005 at 14:35:46 -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 07:54:39AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> >> None of these problems occur w
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 07:54:39AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> None of these problems occur when I use 4 GB memory. About the only
> strangeness, which seems to come from the BIOS, is that it recognizes
> only 3.5 GB. If I put all DIMMS in, it recognizes the full 8 GB
> memory.
>
> I rea
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 09:52:57PM +0100, S?ren Schmidt wrote:
>
> As usual, even if it works on all the HW I have here in the lab, thats by
> far not the same as it works on YOUR system. So use glowes and safety shoes
> and if it breaks I dont want the pieces, but would like to hear the nifty
> d
32 matches
Mail list logo
